3 ms·

If targeting Taiwan Straits, US military’s B-21 will only be a paper plane

2 points by graderjs 4y ago

powerbroker 4y ago
Interesting vernacular in this piece. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_mace https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_mace
rektide 4y ago
> However, it is necessary to remind, even if one is not a military professional or a scholar, it is easy to understand that the so-called deterrence is always a combination of military power and political determination. Perhaps the least compelling series of counter-arguments I have ever heard. Ok this bomber alone by itself will not halt a bloody-minded authoritarian possessed of notions of subjugating it's neighbors. But holy heck yes a modern competitive strike platform can potentially make a huge difference in denying an aggressor control & free reign of a situation. > On the contrary, it has gone even harder in its pursuit of hegemony. The B-2 bomber has also been regarded as a "financial disaster" due to its high cost. The US isnt without sin, but creating a world hegemony it is not. More deeply weird projection, trying to warp & distort reality. The B-2 is a plane we thankfully havent had to use. Conventional strike bombers have generally sufficed. It's unknown how effective this deterrant has been, because thankfully no one has stepped up on the world stage to be a godawful menace to humanity. It's hard to assess what that cost has really bought. Who knows; Mmaybe we have ripped ourselves off. I feel weird defending the united states war-industry, but the capability, thankfully unused, feels like an expenditure for an immense capability, and the lack of using this costly tool adds to the worthiness & purpose inherent.
hindsightbias 4y ago
So the premise is the US exaggerates Chinese intentions but “it will only become a paper airplane that will be gently falling down in the face of the iron wall of the PLA and the strong will of the 1.4 billion Chinese people.” Got it. I wonder if their strategy is also generated by GPT-3 like this article was.

2 points by graderjs 4y ago

Interesting vernacular in this piece. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_mace https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassin%27s_mace

rektide 4y ago

> However, it is necessary to remind, even if one is not a military professional or a scholar, it is easy to understand that the so-called deterrence is always a combination of military power and political determination. Perhaps the least compelling series of counter-arguments I have ever heard. Ok this bomber alone by itself will not halt a bloody-minded authoritarian possessed of notions of subjugating it's neighbors. But holy heck yes a modern competitive strike platform can potentially make a huge difference in denying an aggressor control & free reign of a situation. > On the contrary, it has gone even harder in its pursuit of hegemony. The B-2 bomber has also been regarded as a "financial disaster" due to its high cost. The US isnt without sin, but creating a world hegemony it is not. More deeply weird projection, trying to warp & distort reality. The B-2 is a plane we thankfully havent had to use. Conventional strike bombers have generally sufficed. It's unknown how effective this deterrant has been, because thankfully no one has stepped up on the world stage to be a godawful menace to humanity. It's hard to assess what that cost has really bought. Who knows; Mmaybe we have ripped ourselves off. I feel weird defending the united states war-industry, but the capability, thankfully unused, feels like an expenditure for an immense capability, and the lack of using this costly tool adds to the worthiness & purpose inherent.

hindsightbias 4y ago

So the premise is the US exaggerates Chinese intentions but “it will only become a paper airplane that will be gently falling down in the face of the iron wall of the PLA and the strong will of the 1.4 billion Chinese people.” Got it. I wonder if their strategy is also generated by GPT-3 like this article was.